In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 402 / 2010
1) Angshuman Bhattacharjee,
S/o Sri Omkar Nath Bhattacharjee,
96/3C, Tollygunge Road, P.S. Tollygunge, Kolkata – 700026. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) HDFC Bank, Cards Division,
Gillander House, 8, Netaji Subhas Road, Kolkata – 700001
2) Mr. Rupesh Pandey, Officer, HDFC Bank, Cards Division,
Gillander House, 8, Netaji Subhas Road, Kolkata – 700001
3) Branch Manager, HDFC Bank, No.9
Eterna Koramangla Industrial Layout,
Koramangla, Bangalore, Karnataka – 560095 --------- Opposite Parties
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri ,Member
Smt. Sharmi Basu ,Member
Order No. 18 Dated 07/09/2012.
The petition of complaint has been filed by the complainant…….. against the o.ps. …. The complainant has filed the case for deficiency in service and/or unfair traded practice being adopted by o.ps. while rendering services to complainant with respect to Credit Card A/C no.5243681101017039 having credit limit of Rs.1,35,000/- as well as Salary A/C no.00531610086431 being maintained with the o.ps. by illegal and unilateral reduction of credit limits, illegal claim of interest and penal charges, illegal withdrawal of amount from the salary account of the complainant without his consent and as per the complainant o.ps. adopted illegal measure for recovery of the unlawful claim by sending hired goondas in the guise of recovery agent causing tremendous harassment, mental agony, monetary loss and damages and suffering of humiliation in the presence of customers who were present while the credit card was used for payment of the bill but the transaction was declined due to illegal reduction of credit limit.
O.ps. had entered their appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against them ands prayed for dismissal of the case.
Decision with reasons:-
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular. It is observed that it is admitted fact that complainant availed the credit card, having credit limit of Rs.1,35,000/- from o.ps. Complainant being a bona fide consumer went on making payment of the alleged due regularly. It is also admitted fact that as the complainant made payment regularly there was no claim of o.ps. till the month of March, 2010 and ultimately cause of action has arisen when complainant commanded his credit card for payment of bill for the articles purchased by him and on application of such credit card the transaction was declined due to unavailability of credit limit. Later from statement of account for the month of June 2010 he came to know that the credit limit of his credit card was reduced to Rs.93,000/- from Rs.1,35,000/- without giving any information to him regarding intention of the bank for deduction of such credit limit and ultimately notice dt.31.10.10 by o.ps. was received by complainant wherein he was informed that his Salary Account has placed a ‘Hold on Funds’ by exercising “Banking lien and right of set of’ option to the extend of the outstanding balance of complainant. From the record it is crystal clear that o.ps. have failed to produce any document to show that there was any consent of complainant or there was any stipulation for the exercise of power by o.ps. It is also fact that o.ps. have not denied specifically that they have not sent hired goondas in the guise of recovery agent to recover the outstanding due from complainant. O.ps. have also failed to produce any document that they sent regularly statement of account to complainant. But as per the guidelines issued by RBI pertaining to “Master Circular on Credit Card Operations of Banks”. Moreover, as per the guidelines issued by RBI pertaining to ‘fair practice’ the bank cannot use force to recover its outstanding dues. Here we quote the related RBI guideline “Banks / NBFCs / their agents should not resort to intimidation or harassment of any kind, either verbal or physical against any person in their debt collection efforts, including acts intended to humiliate publicly intrude the privacy of he credit card holder’s family members, referees and friends, making threatening and anonymous calls or making false and misleading representations”. It is also pertinent from the record that the complainant was never made security for the alleged outstanding due of the credit card in question.
It is also observed by this Forum that o.ps. have failed to establish that the amount of Rs.32,152.89 had been expensed by complainant through his credit card. Therefore, in this regard we are strongly of the opinion that the aforesaid amount of Rs.32,152.89 should be credited to the account of the complainant by o.ps.
Considering the above discussion we are of the opinion that o.ps. have committed deficiencies in rendering service towards the complainant / consumer and for this act of o.ps. the complainant has to suffer tremendous mental agony degradation in the society and humiliation and harassment and he is entitled to be compensated by o.ps.
Hence ordered,
That the petition of complaint is allowed on contest against the o.ps. with cost. O.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to credit the amount of Rs.32,152.89 (Rupees thirty two thousand one hundred fifty two and paise eighty nine) only to the account in question of complainant and to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) only as compensation for tremendous mental agony degradation in the society and humiliation and harassment and litigation cost of Rs.3000/- (Rupees three thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
